SRI PURUSHOTHAM MUNIPILLAPPA V. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

WP/20093/2021

AI Insights

The case involves two writ petitions filed by Sri. Purushotham Munipillappa against the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax and the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, challenging the exparte assessment orders and demand notices issued for the assessment years 2019-20 and 2013-14. The petitioner argued that he was unable to respond to the notices due to technical issues with the e-filing system, which were beyond his control. The respondents contended that the petitioner failed to file the required objections/details by the stipulated deadline. The court examined the evidence of technical glitches and concluded that these issues prevented the petitioner from complying with the notices, thus violating the principles of natural justice.

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 763091 (HC-KARNATAKA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 25-11-2021
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India, Section 156 of the IT Act
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: E I SANMATHI; K V ARAVIND
• Assessee Lawyers: M V SESHACHALA
• Keywords: Demand notice; Exparte assessment order; Natural Justice; Technical glitches
• Section: 156; 226; 227

Judgement Text

"1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2021 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR W.P.No.20093/2021 C/W W.P.No.20005/2021(T-IT) In W.P.No.20093/2021 BETWEEN: SRI. PURUSHOTHAM MUNIPILLAPPA, S/O MUNI PILLAPPA, AGED 50 YEARS, R/AT No.176, CQAL LAYOUT, NEAR UCO BANK, SAHAKAR NAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 092. … PETITIONER (BY SRI. M.V.SESHACHALA, SENIOR COUNSEL APPEARING FOR SRI.ARAVIND V.CHAVAN, ADV.) AND: 1. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), C.R.BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 001. 2. PRL. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, C.R.BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 001. … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. E.I.SANMATHI ALONG WITH SRI. K.V.ARAVIND, ADV., FOR R-1 & R-2) 2 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE EXPARTE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 29.09.2021 PASSED BY R-1 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2019-20 PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-H5, AND DEMAND NOTICE DATED 29.09.2021 ANNEXURE-H6, ETC. In W.P.No.20005/2021 BETWEEN: SRI. PURUSHOTHAM MUNIPILLAPPA, S/O MUNI PILLAPPA, AGED 50 YEARS, R/AT No.176, CQAL LAYOUT, NEAR UCO BANK, SAHAKAR NAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 092. … PETITIONER (BY SRI. M.V.SESHACHALA, SENIOR COUNSEL APPEARING FOR SRI.ARAVIND V.CHAVAN, ADV.) AND: 1. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), C.R.BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 001. 2. PRL. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, C.R.BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 001. … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. E.I.SANMATHI ALONG WITH SRI. K.V.ARAVIND, ADV., FOR R-1 & R-2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE EXPARTE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 28.09.2021 PASSED BY R1 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14 3 PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-H5, AND DEMAND NOTICE UNDER SECTION 156 OF THE IT ACT DATED 28.09.2021 ANNEXURE-H6. THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER 1. In W.P.No.20093/2021, petitioner has sought for the following relief: \"Issue a Writ of certiorari to quash the exparte assessment order dated 29.09.2021 passed by first respondent for the Assessment Year 2019-20 produced as Annexure-H5, bearing No.ITBA/AST/M/153A/2021- 22/1035993487(1) and demand notice u/s. 156 of the IT Act dated 29.09.2021 bearing No.ITBA/AST/S/156/2021-22/103599349(1) Annexure- H6.\" 2. In W.P.No.20005/2021, petitioner has sought for the following relief: \"Issue a Writ of certiorari to quash the exparte assessment order dated 28.09.2021 passed by first respondent for the Assessment Year 2013-14 produced as Annexure-H5, bearing No.ITBA/AST/S/153A/2021- 22/1035988742(1) and demand notice u/s. 156 of the IT Act dated 28.09.2021 bearing No.ITBA/AST/S/156/2021-22/1035988750(1) Annexure-H6.\" 4 2. Heard Sri. M.V.Seshachala, learned Senior Counsel for Sri Aravind Chavan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri E.I.Sanmathi, learned counsel along with Sri K.V.Aravind, learned counsel for respondents. 3. Though several contentions have been urged by the petitioner in support of his contention, the material on record, in particular, the notice dated 11.09.2021 will indicate that the petitioner was called upon to furnish information, details, etc., on or before 17.09.2021. It is the grievance of the petitioner that despite he being ready and willing to furnish the information electronically in 'E-proceeding' through his account in 'e-filing' website of the Department, he was not in a position to do so on account of several technical glitches in the website as evident from Annexures-J1 to J6, all of which establish that many persons including the petitioner were not in a position to furnish the details/information as sought for from them. It is, therefore, contended that the impugned assessment orders dated 28.09.2021 and 29.09.2021, by which date technical glitches had not been rectified and without providing any opportunity to the 5 petitioner is violative of principles of natural justice and the impugned assessment order and demand notice deserve to be quashed. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents, in addition to supporting the impugned assessment order, submits that a perusal of the assessment order will indicate that the petitioner was called upon to file objections/details on or before 17.09.2021 and since the petitioner did not do so, respondents proceeded to pass the impugned order which does not warrant any interference by this Court in the present petition. 5. As rightly contended by the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner, a perusal of the material on record, in particular, Annexures-J1 to J6 will indicate that though the petitioner was called upon to file returns/objections/response on or before 17.09.2021, the petitioner could not do so on account of several technical glitches in the website/portal of the respondents, which prevented the petitioner and acted as an impediment and obstacle for the petitioner to respond the notice dated 11.09.2021 within the stipulated period as indicated in the 6 notice or even up to the date of impugned assessment order i.e., 29.09.2021 in W.P.No.20093/2021 and 28.09.2021 in W.P.No.20005/2021. 6. Under these circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that the inability and omission on the part of the petitioner to file the returns/response/details on or before 17.09.2021 or even up to the date of the impugned assessment order was on account of the technical glitches attributable only to the respondents and due to bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances and sufficient cause and failure to appreciate this on the part of the respondents is in violation of principles of natural justice warranting interference by this Court in the present petition. 7. In the result, I pass the following: ORDER (i) The petitions are hereby allowed. (ii) The impugned assessment order dated 29.09.2021 at Annexure-H5 and the demand notice dated 29.09.2021 at Annexure-H6 in W.P.No.20093/2021 are hereby quashed. 7 (iii) The impugned assessment order dated 28.09.2021 at Annexure-H5 and the demand notice dated 28.09.2021 at Annexure-H6 in W.P.No.20005/2021 are hereby quashed. (iv) The matter is remitted back to respondent No.1 for reconsideration afresh after providing sufficient and reasonable opportunity to the petitioner to file his objections/returns/response etc and to proceed to pass orders in accordance with law. SD/- JUDGE PKS "